Murphy v. Baltimore & Ohio S.-W. R. R.
Court of Appeals of Kentucky
Case 79 — Action by J'ohn F. Murphy against the B. & O. S'. W. R. R.' Company to Recover Damages for Personal Injury!— Feb. 3. APPEAL FROM JEFFERSON CIRCUIT COURT. Judgment for Defendant and Plaintiff Appeals. CLASSIFICATION OF QUESTIONS OF LAW. 1. Even if a brakeman discovers danger, where the whole transaction is the occurrence of a moment, he is not to be held responsible if he errs as to the estimate of danger that -confronts him.
Read the full summary
Case 79 — Action by J'ohn F. Murphy against the B. & O. S'. W. R. R.' Company to Recover Damages for Personal Injury!— Feb. 3. APPEAL FROM JEFFERSON CIRCUIT COURT. Judgment for Defendant and Plaintiff Appeals. CLASSIFICATION OF QUESTIONS OF LAW. 1. Even if a brakeman discovers danger, where the whole transaction is the occurrence of a moment, he is not to be held responsible if he errs as to the estimate of danger that -confronts him. Defective Coupler; Goodrich v. N. Y. Cent. R. R., 22 N. F., p. 397. -Climbing ladder. No lantern: Fox v. Chicago, St. P. R. R., 17 L. R. A., 289. 2. The case at…
1Opinion of the Court
*698Opinion op the court by
JUDGE SETTEE —
Reversing.
The appellant, John F. Murphy, while in the service of the appellee, Baltimore & Ohio Southwestern Railroad, as a brakeman upon one of its freight trains, in attempting to make a coupling had his arm caught between two cars-, wounding and mangling it to such an extent as to require amputation between the elbow and shoulder. The petition alleges, in substance, that his injuries were caused by the negligence of the appellee in providing a defective engine for pulling its train of cars, and in failing to provide a good and sufficient coupler for one…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Goodrich v. . N.Y.C. H.R.R.R. Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1889
3Cited by2 opinions
- Kambour v. Boston & Maine RailroadSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1913
- Louisville & Nashville Railroad v. Franklin's AdministratorCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1915